Car maker cheats on emissions, car maker pays the price, people still single out Tesla

[T34ME]

Why should those making 45K a year give a $14,000 subsidy to someone who can afford a $200,000 Model X?

Because some governments (national, state, province) are trying to encourage a transition to a sustainable future. They can either give rebates and credits for EVs or those making $45K people can pay for ICE transportation in future higher health care costs, government subsidies to natural disaster areas, and higher death rates from environmental causes.

Can't say for Canada, but here in the US, the government subsidizes the oil industry to the tune of about US$10K-12K per ICE vehicle to support lower gasoline prices. For those that are climate science deniers this means nothing to them. For those that are anti-socialism supporters. let's get rid of subsidies to the oil industry. In the meantime. I am perfectly happy with a permanent extension of rebates and tax credits for BEVs. And, I do not drive a $200K model X. I drive a US$53K + taxes, 3MR that is US$42,550 after tax credits and rebates (and would be even less for those in lower income brackets).

 

[T34ME]

I don't care who made those cars. It was wrong for the working class to subsidize the wealthy.

There are many in the working class who are wealthy (need to define what "wealthy" is) in every nation. I think what you are saying is those living in poverty (below a defined income level, which varies) should not subsidize those who are not living in poverty. But those living in poverty don't pay taxes, at least here in the US, so they aren't paying for any subsidies to anyone. In fact, they RECEIVE subsidies, and I support that as a "wealthy" person by your undefined definition since I own and drive a model 3.

Here in the great State of Californation (5th largest economy in the world), it is the wealthy subsidizing the wealthy who support a sustainable future. It is called a "Progressive" form of government.

 

[1375mlm]

2 Civic SI sedans for less.

Your argument keeps changing. First it’s the M3 is too expensive. Then it’s that ALL Teslas are more expensive than expected because YOU’RE buying the performance model, and that no one can do math.
Now you’re arguing for gasoline cars?
Sure you COULD drive the civic for “peanuts” as intended originally, but as an Indian person part of an Indian family who has owned nothing but Toyota’s and Honda’s, and I’m talking in the dozens, I have some experience.
Expensive maintenance is required. Oil changes and brakes are just applicable to any brand new car. But used cars are infinitely worse in maintenance costs.


The cheapest gasoline could barely compare to the most expensive home electricity
And for an apples to apples comparison,
Not only would both of your civics PALE in comparison to the M3’s safety and performance, but also in terms of features and tech.
Math isn’t hard...

 

[T34ME]

Not only would both of your civics PALE in comparison to the M3’s safety and performance, but also in terms of features and tech.
Math isn’t hard...

Agree, math is difficult for some people. The TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) of a model 3 is about 25% of the TCO for a Civic. if you can drive a Civic for "peanuts" then you can drive a model 3 for 75% fewer peanuts. And as a "wealthy person" (since I drive a model 3) my TCO is <10% of a Civic since I installed Solar City PV panels on my roof. My PV system paid for itself in 4 years through ZERO electrical utility cost and I am fine with subsidizing those below the poverty level with low or no electric utility rates but drive Civics.

 

[ricohman]

I pay a lot of income tax in Canada, and taxes on everything else. I support a lot of social programs I disagree with. But I am glad that 180K EV's are no longer subsidized. Are you guys saying only those that can afford an EV should be able to reduce their carbon footprint? Because that is what you are saying.
EV's in general are to expensive for most people to drive. This is a fact. Deal with it.
If I really wanted to drive cheap I would just buy an old 30 mpg beater for $2500 and drive it for 200,000 kms.

 

[Uncle Paul]

Governments are not subsidizing EV's to help the rich, but to take polluting ICE vehicles off the road to provide cleaner air for everyone.

Too many ICE vehicles are being used in our Urban areas. This is causing citizens to become sick and it is a burden on the health care system as well.

Moving to cleaner transportation is a goal of these governments. Some are banning completely ICE cars from coming into their city centers all together, or charging them a pollution tax to congregate inside the cities.

Because EVs are relatively low production number vehicles, they initially will cost more than the gassers. The intent of the government subsidies is to encourage people to buy and drive them so they will become less expensive in the future.

Later on, the prices of EVs will come down, and their refinement will go up. The end result will be cleaner and quieter cities for all.

 

[ricohman]

That is a BS argument. The community is paying to take an ICE off the roads because that benefits everybody. It does not matter one whit which ICE was removed.

Disagree with this completely. The lower income people drive crap that spews out far for emissions than what wealthy people drive.
In SK we have cars from the 70's and 80's rattling around everywhere.

 

[Darthbenji]

Disagree with this completely. The lower income people drive crap that spews out far for emissions than what wealthy people drive.
In SK we have cars from the 70's and 80's rattling around everywhere.

So is your argument that society should do nothing that may offend poor people? Should we also assume those offended are incapable of actually understanding how a program works and is costed before it’s implemented? That the moment someone gets something that another didn’t it must be unfair? Maybe part of the green initiative should be to set a guaranteed minimum income for everyone first so that they can’t bitch when the rest of the plan is rolled out. Governments aren’t allowed to spend 10 cents on anything until the poor people aren’t poor. Anything else and people bitch.

Wait, then it’ll be why are my tax dollars going to make a poor person not poor? They’re not my responsibility!!! They should get a job or go back to school. Blah blah blah.

 

[ricohman]

So is your argument that society should do nothing that may offend poor people? Should we also assume those offended are incapable of actually understanding how a program works and is costed before it’s implemented? That the moment someone gets something that another didn’t it must be unfair? Maybe part of the green initiative should be to set a guaranteed minimum income for everyone first so that they can’t bitch when the rest of the plan is rolled out. Governments aren’t allowed to spend 10 cents on anything until the poor people aren’t poor. Anything else and people bitch.

I can afford a 100K car.
I do not want any subsidy. Period.
I will never agree with this.

 

[Darthbenji]

I can afford a 100K car.
I do not want any subsidy. Period.
I will never agree with this.

I’m not sure why you continue to use 100k as your argument number when it was shown to you that you were wrong about it for Ontario.
In any case, so what that you can afford it? So can I. So can many here.

The rebate was so that when you’re spending that money on a car anyway, you choose the one that’s better for the ecology. Maybe you’d made up your mind already to get the EV and so the rebate wasn’t a factor. For an undecided person that’s going to spend that money anyway, the rebate may very well work and keep an ICE off the road.

Let’s also not forget, ICE vehicles in this price range generally take far more gasoline than the civic you suggest. No one was weighing the pros and cons between a 75k EV and a 20k econobox. That’s a false bs logic argument. People spending 75k for a car aren’t debating between a model 3 or an Elantra.

 

[SageBrush]

Disagree with this completely. The lower income people drive crap that spews out far for emissions than what wealthy people drive.
In SK we have cars from the 70's and 80's rattling around everywhere.

And you are not willing to put them in a different car ... but "rich" people spend their own money to buy an EV. By the way, a cash for clunkers scheme was tried in the US. It turned into one huge giveaway to the car dealerships, perhaps as intended.

 

[ricohman]

I’m not sure why you continue to use 100k as your argument number when it was shown to you that you were wrong about it for Ontario.
In any case, so what that you can afford it? So can I. So can many here.

The rebate was so that when you’re spending that money on a car anyway, you choose the one that’s better for the ecology. Maybe you’d made up your mind already to get the EV and so the rebate wasn’t a factor. For an undecided person that’s going to spend that money anyway, the rebate may very well work and keep an ICE off the road.

Let’s also not forget, ICE vehicles in this price range generally take far more gasoline than the civic you suggest. No one was weighing the pros and cons between a 75k EV and a 20k econobox. That’s a false bs logic argument. People spending 75k for a car aren’t debating between a model 3 or an Elantra.

Then use a 60K car. Still out of reach.

 

[SageBrush]

I do not want any subsidy. Period.

No problem, don't take the rebate.

 

[SageBrush]

Then use a 60K car. Still out of reach.

Is it ? How much is spent on petrol in Canada over say the 300 km lifetime of a car ?

 

[ricohman]

Is it ? How much is spent on petrol in Canada over say the 300 km lifetime of a car ?

Somebody making ends meet can afford 30 bucks a week for fuel. They do not have to pay it all at once.

 

[Darthbenji]

Somebody making ends meet can afford 30 bucks a week for fuel. They do not have to pay it all at once.

Ok but just because there are poor people it doesn’t mean society and advancement grind to a halt. We don’t all go in the same direction together. It’s not communism.

 

[ricohman]

Ok but just because there are poor people it doesn’t mean society and advancement grind to a halt. We don’t all go in the same direction together. It’s not communism.

I realize that.
But a 25k EV that can go 400km and work well in the cold would incite far more people to switch than the present offerings.

 

[Merrill]

Tesla is always singled out for everything negative, there are lots of subsidies for going green. If you drive an ICE your cheap gasoline is subsidized, and as I have said before if you end subsidies for green energy you need to end them for fossil fuel. That will not happen because those politicians that run the country are making money from oil and are in bed with those who produce it.

 

[Eno Deb]

I can afford a 100K car.
I do not want any subsidy. Period.
I will never agree with this.

I agree with you. For wealthy people it is unlikely that the tax rebate is a deciding factor for their purchase decision, so in those cases it's just a waste of tax payer money. I think the best way to do this is to have an income cap for the tax incentive (which is what California does for its clean vehicle rebate program).

 

[SageBrush]

Somebody making ends meet can afford 30 bucks a week for fuel. They do not have to pay it all at once.

I don't know you came up with $30 a week. Do you ?

In any case, a Tesla does not have to be paid all at once either.

For someone so concerned over "poor" people, you are remarkably clueless.